Replies

No, after BF1 I don't really have any interest in Battlefield anymore, they cling to the if it isn't broken don't fix it mentality which I understand but I'm just not interested in what has been working for their past 4 titles anymore.

I'll be burying myself in red dead 2 like you Steve. Waiting for that puppy everyday lol as far as shooters go, probably won't get battlefield, after 4 I'm less interested. I'll be battlefronting with y'all a long time to come

I bought bf1. thought it was pretty fun but didnt have a lot of time for it. I bought season pass for $49. I never played as much as I wanted but I do wish that bf2 had as much content post launch as battlefield 1 season patch. it was an absolute massive amount of content. I wasted $49 but I'd say it was worth the cost if you were more into the game than I was.

I bought bf1. thought it was pretty fun but didnt have a lot of time for it. I bought season pass for $49. I never played as much as I wanted but I do wish that bf2 had as much content post launch as battlefield 1 season patch. it was an absolute massive amount of content. I wasted $49 but I'd say it was worth the cost if you were more into the game than I was.

That stinks.

I wonder if Battlefield V’s take on a live service system will work better than Battlefront 2’s.

Battlefield games are really hit or miss for me. I started with bad company 2 I really liked bad company 2.
I didn't like battlefield 3 , 4 or hardline.
I liked Battlefield 1. But Battlefield 5 I am just not interested.

With games like Farm 51s world war 3 coming out on pc and Insurgency sandstorm coming to console eventually I do not really have interest in Battlefield 5.

Plus there are many non shooter games I want to spend money on instead.

Battlefield games are really hit or miss for me. I started with bad company 2 I really liked bad company 2.
I didn't like battlefield 3 , 4 or hardline.
I liked Battlefield 1. But Battlefield 5 I am just not interested.

With games like Farm 51s world war 3 coming out on pc and Insurgency sandstorm coming to console eventually I do not really have interest in Battlefield 5.

Plus there are many non shooter games I want to spend money on instead.

I'm actually not to keen on much of the dumbing down in terms of mechanical changes I've seen thus far in V, but yeah I'm probably going to get it sooner or later (not immediately, not after Brokenfield 4's launch).

I played both 4 and 1 (still do) concurrently with Battlefront. They are different games and scratch different itch.

Founding member and commissar in chief of the Church of Janina. PSN: HanGerrelShot1st

No, after BF1 I don't really have any interest in Battlefield anymore, they cling to the if it isn't broken don't fix it mentality which I understand but I'm just not interested in what has been working for their past 4 titles anymore.

Funny thing is that around 75% of my more hardcore Battlefield playing friends played BF1 for about a week before going back to the modern titles, because even with the only moderate changes to core gameplay and concessions made in the interest of keeping it similar (e.g. automatic weapons still everywhere in order to maintain the 4 class structure, despite 99% of everyone using bolt action rifles in the real war) it was far too different mechanically from those games for those battlefield 3/4 fanbois to get invested in.

Problem is the series picked up so much steam and got so exponentially much more mainstream between BC2 and BF4 (when it went to war with CoD for the crown of the casual FPS market) that more experimental takes like 2142 or 1943 wouldn't fly today (evidenced by even the moderately different BF1 falling behind BF4 in playercount after a few months). The series now has to be conservative and cater to large audience that came to it as result of those games.

Founding member and commissar in chief of the Church of Janina. PSN: HanGerrelShot1st

Someone once told Anarchy Ninja that playing in first person gives them a headache and he has mocked that comment ever since.

Ah, well it does. Tried it in bf1. Was getting motion sick.

Have had the same problem since overplaying the original Turok. Yes I am old. Red dead is 3rd person Right? Might try that one.

Indeed it is 3rd person. P.s. I remember playing OG turok too, we ain't that old man lol

Thanks bro. Ill be playing battlefront regardless, but the content might not be enough to keep me from trying something else. Used to be a big resident evil player, but even that went first person. Ill probably try the re2 remake in January though.

Original Turok. That was some fun. I remember the bow and arrow and some stones that would light up. Of course, dinosaurs! I usually buy a ton of games. I still have a bunch unopened. I'll do Red for sure and maybe BF5 but like some others I prefer 3rd person SOCOM style.

No way. BFV is a bit too much sjw in it. No matter what you say right now BF2 is pretty solid game...apart from the broken matchmaking and 100+ existing bugs...it's still my go to game on all 3 platforms

Someone once told Anarchy Ninja that playing in first person gives them a headache and he has mocked that comment ever since.

Ah, well it does. Tried it in bf1. Was getting motion sick.

I once played Borderlands 2 and it made me feel sooooooooo ill after about 15 minutes. I never played it again and returned it It was terrible, I felt so bad :P

Original question:

It... depends? Im not a shooter fan at all, I muuucchh prefer fantasy RPGs and maybe a few sci-fi ones but only a few. I bought Battlefront II mostly because of the singleplayer campaign and well... because its Star Wars. I skipped Battlefront I because it was an online only multiplayer shooter and I disliked the DLC model.

But the thing is, I quite enjoy Battlefront II multiplayer but idk if that's because its Star Wars or not. Would I enjoy a similar game if it was another universe? Idk. Not sure.

One thing I think Battlefront II needs are customization options for men and women. 70% of all the classes in the game that COULD have gender customization options (so excluding the Separatists and Republic) are male. And it sucks. I love having ways to customize my characters, in an RPG game with a character creator Ill spend so much time making a character for myself that I can enjoy playing the game with. I find it fun, and it also helps me to get emotionally invested in a game.

Thats where Battlefield V happens, because it has customization options for men and women and thats something that excites me and makes me happy. Part of me is actually looking forward to having appearance options then using that character to play online. It isnt something that I do in the games Ive played because theyre mostly offline.

I also think the game might have some kind of emotional depth, but I might be wrong. My general conclusion is "wait and play the beta" because while I am excited by the game, it's... still a shooter. And Im not sure if I would enjoy them yet. Ive never played a Battlefield game so I would have no idea what Im doing, and I dont want to take the chance of preordering the game when shooters have been typically not enjoyable for me. So Ill play the beta and find out what the mechanics are like and whether they agree with me (and hopefully find out that the customization options are for all classes, not just pushing women into the specialist and Aerials for the most part *sigh*). If I enjoy the beta, I might pre-order. If I dont, I wont

To the people who dislike the customization options in Battlefield V, just as a small note:

The developers have said they prioritized entertainment over realism, and thats a thing. Imo, that should close all reasonable arguments about the customization, because criticizing something for not being realistic when they had more priorities is kinda weird. There are many more WWII shooters out there that have put more effort into realism - personally, I would choose player choice and more options over 100% realism because its genuinely more fun for me. However, there were women who fought in WWII in a number of different roles and for a number of reasons - not as many as men, nowhere close, but they had a role to play and I think its important for something to recognize that also, even in a slightly... exaggerated way? What the developers are doing is combining real events with game mechanics and player options to try and make it as fun as possible for all people. That doesnt make them "sjw" (honestly, I find it reaaaalllyyy hard to take people who use that term seriously anyway). It just means theyre trying to make a fun game... which is actually acknowledging the existence of female gamers. For once. :P Shooters dont tend to do that. There is no reason why, in a work of fiction, the options I have to customize my character should be in any way limited by my gender, I dont think thats fair tbh.
Either way, there is a lack of information atm given how the game hasnt released and things. Maybe you might be surprized by how they incorporate female characters into the game. Or maybe people will keep trying to have the options many players will have/use removed from the game for their own personal views/gain *shrug*

"The question," she replied, "Is not whether you will love, hurt, dream, and die. It is what you will love, why you will hurt, when you will dream, and how you will die. This is your choice. You cannot pick the destination, only the path." - Oathbringer.